Jump to content


***2015 Recruiting***


Recommended Posts


 

 

I don't like him because I've seen him play...

That's strange. The few times he's been on the field he's been reasonably productive considering the circumstances. Unless you've seen him play in situations other than what we've all seen, I'm curious to how you've come to this conclusion?
I disagree with you for the record. But this isn't the place to discuss it.
Link to comment

Three spots left but spread among five positions. Curious to see what happens. We are almost assuredly taking a LB and will take a LS if Ober says yes. Not sure who the staff would take after that.

LB - One more. Not sure if we prefer Hall or Garbutt (both visiting this weekend) but Talan seems to be behind them.
DE - Taking one. No idea what our order is. Davis visiting this weekend.
WR - Alston (visiting) if he wants N
OL - Paulo (visiting) if he wants N
LS - Ober (visiting) or we'll have to scramble pretty fast.

------------------------------------

QB - 0
RB - 1 - Ozigbo
WR - 2 - Morgan (Alston)
TE - 1 - Snyder
OT - 1-2 - Gaylord (Paulo)
OG/C - 2 - Decker, Barnett

DT - 2 - C. Davis, K. Davis
DE - 2 - Neal, (Bailey, Roberts, Davis)
LB - 4 - Young, Ferguson, Barry (Talan, Hall, Garbutt)
CB - 2 - Lee, Anderson
S - 2 - Williams, Sykes

LS - 1 - (Ober)

Link to comment

 

 

» Social media engagement. You may have noticed that, thus far, Nebraska’s assistant coaches don’t tweet too much. Or you may not have noticed it because the Huskers have so successfully leveraged and empowered their support staff to do the tweeting for the staff.

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/mckewon-nebraska-staff-s-done-well-ahead-of-last-dash/article_242f5eca-0d70-59b0-8e49-d5f8cb8cc136.html

Link to comment

That's the thing - I really don't think we can take all of them. Seems like we can only take three which I think will for sure be a LB, the LS will get a spot if he wants it but I'm not sure what we'd do after that.

 

The only odd think is I've seen a couple rumblings about who was included in the 19 that Gunderson said we'd take. The question is whether the four early enrollees were included in that number. I think they would have been but for some reason a couple people are questioning that. The only way that would be possible is if there are already more guys who have left. That wouldn't seem to make any sense and there haven't been any names mentioned but I guess it's possible.

Link to comment

That's the thing - I really don't think we can take all of them. Seems like we can only take three which I think will for sure be a LB, the LS will get a spot if he wants it but I'm not sure what we'd do after that.

 

The only odd think is I've seen a couple rumblings about who was included in the 19 that Gunderson said we'd take. The question is whether the four early enrollees were included in that number. I think they would have been but for some reason a couple people are questioning that. The only way that would be possible is if there are already more guys who have left. That wouldn't seem to make any sense and there haven't been any names mentioned but I guess it's possible.

Early enrollees go towards last years number don't They?

Link to comment

 

That's the thing - I really don't think we can take all of them. Seems like we can only take three which I think will for sure be a LB, the LS will get a spot if he wants it but I'm not sure what we'd do after that.

 

The only odd think is I've seen a couple rumblings about who was included in the 19 that Gunderson said we'd take. The question is whether the four early enrollees were included in that number. I think they would have been but for some reason a couple people are questioning that. The only way that would be possible is if there are already more guys who have left. That wouldn't seem to make any sense and there haven't been any names mentioned but I guess it's possible.

Early enrollees go towards last years number don't They?

 

 

They can but it doesn't matter at this point. The only number is 85 - or 88 with the three over-signings.

Link to comment

 

 

 

That's the thing - I really don't think we can take all of them. Seems like we can only take three which I think will for sure be a LB, the LS will get a spot if he wants it but I'm not sure what we'd do after that.

 

The only odd think is I've seen a couple rumblings about who was included in the 19 that Gunderson said we'd take. The question is whether the four early enrollees were included in that number. I think they would have been but for some reason a couple people are questioning that. The only way that would be possible is if there are already more guys who have left. That wouldn't seem to make any sense and there haven't been any names mentioned but I guess it's possible.

Early enrollees go towards last years number don't They?

They can but it doesn't matter at this point. The only number is 85 - or 88 with the three over-signings.

Bottom line we are at 84 with the current commits we can take 4 more or 3 if we get Lewis to transfer, if they take more than that someone is leaving the program that we dont know about. Or they pretty much know someone won't qualify
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...